Log In

Take a Look Inside the IGI Annual Report 2015-16: Where Are Organizations Buying IG Services?

Have you taken the 2016-2017 IGI Annual Survey? Help us develop our next Annual Report by sharing your insights! Take the Survey today.

In our previous look inside last year’s IGI Annual Report 2015-2016, the industry’s most comprehensive research on information governance (IG) as a concept, profession, and market, we discussed predictions for IG spending in 2016. Today, we look at what technologies the community considers part of the IG market.

Organizations are buying IG services. Forty percent of practitioners reported that their organizations were purchasing IG services, today, and around the same amount reported that they planned to in 2016.

Software and hardware professional services groups were the most commonly identified source of IG services by practitioners now and in 2016, with boutique consulting firms specializing in IG coming in at a close second and law firms third. Just under half said that their organizations are not currently purchasing IG services. Why? Some may be filling their IG personnel needs through other means like direct hiring or internal promotions. Others, however, simply may not be at the optimal IG program maturity level to purchase IG.

IG products and services seem to go hand-in-hand. Indeed, nearly half of our IG provider respondents say that they provide both products and services. Only 14% say they sell products only. Organizations purchasing technology often need help implementing and configuring it, so it is not surprising that professional services groups at software and hardware providers led the way as the most commonly identified source for IG services.

The IGI has begun the process of developing the 2016-2017 IGI Annual Report, building upon the success of the last two years. As part of the research for our Report, we are conducting a survey of information governance professionals. Please participate in our survey to help us create a great resource for the IG Community. The results will be published in a comprehensive Annual Report which will include a variety of infographics and other tools we will freely provide to the IG Community under a Creative Commons license. These infographics have become part of many IG practitioners’ internal presentations, and the Annual Report has become the go-to reference guide for many in the industry. In the meantime, take a look insider last year’s report. All data you provide through this survey will be reported anonymously.

 

What Technologies Are Part of the IG Products Market?

Have you taken the 2016-2017 IGI Annual Survey? Help us develop our next Annual Report by sharing your insights! Take the Survey today.

In our previous look inside last year’s IGI Annual Report 2015-2016, the industry’s most comprehensive research on information governance (IG) as a concept, profession, and market, we discussed predictions for IG spending in 2016. Today, we look at what technologies the community considers part of the IG market.

We asked the IG community which technologies they believed were part of the IG product market. As we saw last year, survey respondents have a very broad understanding of what makes up this market. This is not surprising given the breadth with which the IG community views the concept of IG. The range of technologies required to serve these disparate information-related functions and to address the ways in which information moves between them would necessarily be fairly broad.

Of the twenty-two enumerated technologies, fourteen of them received 50% or more support for inclusion in the IG product market. RIM, information security, e-discovery, data governance, and data storage and archiving were the most popular. Though we did add several additional technologies since last year, we note that across the board for technologies listed both years, the percentage of votes for inclusion in the product market is down. We saw a similar drop for facets the IG community would include in the concept of IG. We see this as a sign that the IG market is starting to mature and that both the technologies and functional areas that make up IG’s core are coming into greater focus.

We do not mean to say that any of the listed products that comprise the IG product market are “IG technologies,” per se, as they are not broad enough to cover all information-related activities in an organization. Each of them is rather a point of management and control of information within the facets to be coordinated by IG.

That said, we were curious to see whether the community thought that there was a category of software or technology on the market that they considered to be “IG” software or technology. Almost half said no; 30% were not sure. However, around a fifth (22%) said yes. Contenders for such a role, as suggested by the comments respondents provided, were technologies that integrated several of the information-related functions of multiple facets across the enterprise. We will continue to focus on these and related questions as we conduct further research on the emerging IG market.

The IGI has begun the process of developing the 2016-2017 IGI Annual Report, building upon the success of the last two years. As part of the research for our Report, we are conducting a survey of information governance professionals. Please participate in our survey to help us create a great resource for the IG Community. The results will be published in a comprehensive Annual Report which will include a variety of infographics and other tools we will freely provide to the IG Community under a Creative Commons license. These infographics have become part of many IG practitioners’ internal presentations, and the Annual Report has become the go-to reference guide for many in the industry. In the meantime, take a look insider last year’s report. All data you provide through this survey will be reported anonymously.

 

Take a Look Inside the IGI Annual Report 2015-16: Spending on IG will Increase

Have you taken the 2016-2017 IGI Annual Survey? Help us develop our next Annual Report by sharing your insights! Take the Survey today.

In our previous look inside last year’s IGI Annual Report 2015-2016 , the industry’s most comprehensive research on information governance (IG) as a concept, profession, and market, we discussed the number of projects organizations are undertaking and what they are spending. Today, we look at predictions for spending increase in 2016.

While the IG market may not be perfectly defined today, organizations are taking action and spending money on IG. However, is spending predicted to increase in 2016? We asked practitioners who told us their organizations had at least one active IG project whether they expected spending to increase in 2016 and, if so, by how much. For providers who reported at least one active IG project at their typical customer, we asked parallel questions with respect to revenue generated from IG. Here is what we found.

Of those practitioners who reported that they were actively doing IG projects today, nearly half said they expected spending to increase next year. Providers are even more optimistic about market growth with 91% telling us they expect revenue earned from IG to increase in 2016. In fact, a solid portion of both groups predict that their spending will increase dramatically. For example, nearly half of practitioners predict an increase of 30% or more, and over one-quarter predict an increase of 50% or more. Of those organizations that report actively doing the work of IG today, a solid segment predict both spending more than last year and a lot more in 2016.

The IGI has begun the process of developing the 2016-2017 IGI Annual Report, building upon the success of the last two years. As part of the research for our Report, we are conducting a survey of information governance professionals. Please participate in our survey to help us create a great resource for the IG Community. The results will be published in a comprehensive Annual Report which will include a variety of infographics and other tools we will freely provide to the IG Community under a Creative Commons license. These infographics have become part of many IG practitioners’ internal presentations, and the Annual Report has become the go-to reference guide for many in the industry. In the meantime, take a look insider last year’s report. All data you provide through this survey will be reported anonymously.

 

Take a Look Inside the IGI Annual Report 2015-16: Organizations Are Taking Action and Spending Money

Have you taken the 2016-2017 IGI Annual Survey? Help us develop our next Annual Report by sharing your insights! Take the Survey today.

In our previous look inside last year’s IGI Annual Report 2015-2016, the industry’s most comprehensive research on information governance (IG) as a concept, profession, and market, we discussed why organizations need IG steering committees. Today, we look at how many IG projects organizations are undertaking and what they are spending.

On average, organizations that are actively doing IG work have multiple projects running at the same time. As the chart below shows, the average number of projects per organization and average total cost per project generally increases with organization size, though this correlation is not perfect. Indeed, within each group (by organization size) there is a wide distribution in both the number of active projects reported (some reported only one and others more than fifty) and the average per-project spend (some reported $10,000 or less, others over $3 million USD). This variation is not surprising given how broadly our community defines IG and its activities and technologies.

There is clearly a wide range of what might constitute an IG project. However, while this variation is predictable, it should be kept in mind when considering these numbers. We also note that when designing the survey, we created an opt-out response, anticipating that both practitioners and some people working for providers might have difficulty answering these questions or may prefer not to. As such, the number of respondents to these questions was lower than the average number of respondents for other, less sensitive questions.

While we did not attempt market-sizing and this data does not predict the overall IG market size, it does show that there is an IG market, and it is growing. Organizations are tackling IG, and they are spending money to get the work done.

The IGI has begun the process of developing the 2016-2017 IGI Annual Report, building upon the success of the last two years. As part of the research for our Report, we are conducting a survey of information governance professionals. Please participate in our survey to help us create a great resource for the IG Community. The results will be published in a comprehensive Annual Report which will include a variety of infographics and other tools we will freely provide to the IG Community under a Creative Commons license. These infographics have become part of many IG practitioners’ internal presentations, and the Annual Report has become the go-to reference guide for many in the industry. In the meantime, take a look insider last year’s report. All data you provide through this survey will be reported anonymously.

 

Are Organizations Using IG Steering Committees?

Have you taken the 2016-2017 IGI Annual Survey? Help us develop our next Annual Report by sharing your insights! Take the Survey today.

In our previous look inside last year’s IGI Annual Report 2015-2016, the industry’s most comprehensive research on information governance (IG) as a concept, profession, and market, we discussed IG leadership trends. Today, we take a look at IG steering committees. Are organizations using them to build support for IG?

As a coordinating function, IG success depends on communication and cooperation among the people representing the separate information disciplines or facets at an organization. IG steering committees are essential. But do most organizations have them, today?

About a third do. While this is a good start, it is not enough, and we recommend that practitioners view this as a critical component of their IG programs and take action to develop even an informal group like this.

If your organization does not have a formal body for making IG decisions, consider forming one soon. Remember this must ultimately be tailored to fit the information environment of your organization. Also consider the state of maturity of the facets of IG. Are all necessary facets in place and are they mature enough to meaningfully participate in the committee? You may need to lay some groundwork in these areas before the committee can be useful. Finally, you will need a leader for the committee or some other way of implementing its suggestions.

The IGI has begun the process of developing the 2016-2017 IGI Annual Report, building upon the success of the last two years. As part of the research for our Report, we are conducting a survey of information governance professionals. Please participate in our survey to help us create a great resource for the IG Community. The results will be published in a comprehensive Annual Report which will include a variety of infographics and other tools we will freely provide to the IG Community under a Creative Commons license. These infographics have become part of many IG practitioners’ internal presentations, and the Annual Report has become the go-to reference guide for many in the industry. In the meantime, take a look insider last year’s report. All data you provide through this survey will be reported anonymously.

 

Who Is Leading IG at Organizations, Today?

Have you taken the 2016-2017 IGI Annual Survey? Help us develop our next Annual Report by sharing your insights! Take the Survey today.

In our previous look inside last year’s IGI Annual Report 2015-2016, the industry’s most comprehensive research on information governance (IG) as a concept, profession, and market, we discussed IG program maturity assessments. Today, we look at IG leadership trends at organizations.

In analyzing the work of IG, we would be remiss to ignore one of the most important parts of any IG program, i.e., the people who design, develop, implement, and enforce our IG programs. In our annual research, IG practitioners identified developing a corporate governance framework for IG as the top project they would undertake if they had authority and budget to do so. These results suggest that there is a real hunger within the IG community for greater clarity on IG operations and leadership. But how are organizations actually addressing IG leadership? Here is what we found.

We asked practitioners if their organizations had delegated overall accountability for IG to a specific individual. Over a third said yes. These numbers are up from last year, and we would expect them to continue to grow as the discipline matures. Of practitioners who reported that their organizations had delegated IG accountability, over a third said that person also had the words “information governance” in their title.

We believe that IG leadership at large, complex organizations calls for a Chief Information Governance Officer (CIGO) who is on par with other C-level roles like the Chief Information Officer, Chief Data Officer, or Chief Information Security Officer. As it stands, just under a third of organizations that have delegated IG authority to someone have also designated an IG leader with this level of authority.

While we advocate for the CIGO role, we certainly recognize that not every organization is ready for one, or indeed, will ever need one. This does not mean organizations cannot benefit from an IG leadership position and at different levels of IG program maturity. The IGI’s CIGO Task Force developed a maturity framework to show what IG leadership might look like at different levels of IG program maturity. The model may be thought of as both descriptive (i.e., showing what an IG leader would do day-to-day at each level) and prescriptive (i.e., showing what it would take to move an organization to the next level). A detailed description of the IG leadership role at each level and a sample job description is available in the CIGO Task Force Report published on December 7, 2015.

Depending on how mature your organization’s IG program is, it may not be ready for a C-suite position for IG. However, that does not mean IG cannot benefit from a designated leader. Look to the maturity framework below for ideas of what an IG leadership role can achieve at your organization’s current IG maturity level.

The IGI has begun the process of developing the 2016-2017 IGI Annual Report, building upon the success of the last two years. As part of the research for our Report, we are conducting a survey of information governance professionals. Please participate in our survey to help us create a great resource for the IG Community. The results will be published in a comprehensive Annual Report which will include a variety of infographics and other tools we will freely provide to the IG Community under a Creative Commons license. These infographics have become part of many IG practitioners’ internal presentations, and the Annual Report has become the go-to reference guide for many in the industry. In the meantime, take a look insider last year’s report. All data you provide through this survey will be reported anonymously.